A case of interpretation? - Religion and Politics in Contemporary Japan - page 134

On the other hand, it highlights the inherent di culty of collective political

action; that is, if the goal is to be a progressive force for changing the wider
social world. The case under study points towards the di culty of knowing

how to do the right thing when you need to make a decision in a highly
complex geo-political situation in which what you want (no war) is seemingly
not possible. Dilemmas arise not because supporters are people with high
ideals, but because of commitment to take the practical actions to realise
these objectives. Their humanistic interpretation of Nichiren and socialisation
practices in Soka Gakkai give rise to a continued commitment to trying to
change the world for the better despite the undesirable choices that at times
lay before their political representatives. The question as to what will happen
once Ikeda passes from the scene is a serious one. Yet, it is clear from evi-
dence in this chapter and the last that young Komeito supporters are engaged
with political issues and debates of the day, and that it would be hard to
interpret their canvassing as zealous but not

' real ' political activities as argued

by Shimada (2007).
This view of their political participation as zealous but not political is
based on an interpretation of trust as naïve when based on social practices
that originate in a religious philosophy that underpins political engagement.
It is based on the belief that political power will always be underhand in some
way. If this is the case, Soka Gakkai members support for Komeito in a

coalition with the LDP may make them no more than right-wing collabora-
tors. Moreover, if trust in political representatives is naïve, politically imma-
ture people who canvass are simply pawns in political power plays. In this
chapter, I have looked at evidence that complicates that picture. While prac-
tical political engagement may open up avenues for misuse, trust is also
clearly necessary not only to motivate engagement with politics but also to be
able to work towards the common good, the ideal of civil society; that is,
unless one wants to argue that any trust in politics or politicians is naïve. The
question of whether or not it would have been better if Komeito had not
'

'

with the LDP by politically supporting the US-led invasion of
Iraq remains for many supporters. At the time, they had to decide what to do
about a disagreeable and unwelcome political situation in which a superpower
was set on going to war. The disastrous situation of violence and su

compromised '

ering for
hundreds of thousands of people that followed as a consequence of lack of
contingency plans made these youths wish that they had known the facts by
which much of the Western world was led astray. The tension that came with
feeling they were compromising, particularly concerning the seriousness of
the Iraq War, was not resolved, but rather suppressed, forgotten or taken as a
situation of sh - ganakatta even at the time when there was still hope about the
positive outcomes from removing Saddam Hussein. This becomes part of an
inevitable or inherent problem with which they have to live in the process of
being engaged in real politics and in supporting a party in government. Still,
most supporters remain optimistic about what political engagement can do,
which is why they continue to engage with the dilemmas of knowing that to